Legal Opinion

Pratt v. Armstrong

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 1, 1934No. 29,945PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

IIOLT, Justice.

Intervener appeals from the order denying it a new trial.

The action was to foreclose a motor vehicle lien filed under the provisions of 2 Mason JVTinn. St. 1927, § § 8521-8528. ■ Appellant intervened, claiming to have bought the automobile involved in good faith for value and without knowledge of the lien. The facts were stipulated. Upon such facts judgment was ordered for plaintiff. Intervener claims the facts entitled it to judgment discharging the automobile from the lien. The appeal presents this question: Is the lien given by § 8521 for storage and repairs of a motor…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Beall v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Lanterman v. LubySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1921
  3. Smith v. Shell Lake Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Babcock v. CobbSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1866
  5. Sundin v. SwansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. DeVries v. City of AustinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1961
  2. Conner v. CaldwellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1940

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API